Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Transaction Oracle > Discussion
Transaction Oracle
— A Timely Look at Transactions as They Happen

Thursday, July 31, 2008

Red Sox - May or May Not Have Acquired Bay

Boston Red Sox - Engaged in a big 3-way trade with the Los Angeles Dodgers and Pittsburgh Pirates that’s too long to describe in a single line.

OK, let’s take it one-by-one.  Assuming of course, this one is correct.  After wacky back-and-forth rumorings-a-transpiring, I don’t know what to believe anymore.

The Pirates trade Jason Bay and get Andy LaRoche, Bryan Morris, Brandon Moss, and Craig Hansen.  I like this package better than the Brignac deal.  They improve the outfield depth and get LaRoche, who, when completely healthy, is a more completed prospect than Brignac is, although not a shortstop.  Like I said in the previous Bay trade entry, it’s the kind of thing the Pirates do need to do, even if Bonifay and Littlefield were too incompetent to build a team properly.  LaRoche has been tentative since coming back, but hopefully that’ll be ironed out for ‘09.  Morris-and-Hansen both have issues to work out in the minors, but they’re about as good as Niemann.

The Dodgers give up LaRoche and Morris for Manny Ramirez.  They should’ve taken Bay, who I’m not convinced is, at this point in their careers, any lesser a player than Manny when defense is included, and he’s signed reasonably for next season.  I’m also not convinced that the Dodgers will end up making the best of the situation - they finally just started taking playing time from Andruw Jones and John Peter, craptastic outfielder, always seems to get playing time no matter what degree of horrible he’s playing in a specific time period.  It’s not a disaster if they go with a Ramirez-Kemp-Ethier outfield, but I don’t think they will and even if they do, the Dodgers are only competing to be the least lousy NL West team.  Of course, it worked for the Cards a couple years ago.

The Red Sox give Hansen, Moss, and Ramirez for Bay.  The Red Sox get rid of their problem and get an essentially equal, cheaper, younger player, but give up Hansen and Moss for it.  I’m not sure, however, either really figured into their long term plans.  Hansen, in particular, kind of fell out of favor - the Red Sox tried to turbo him to the majors the way the A’s did with Huston Street, but Hansen just wasn’t ready then and he’s not really ready now.  Like a lot of pitchers of the type, he just needs to throw more strikes, but that’s easier said than done.

Projections forthcoming - wanted to get the transaction up before the 400 post thread tires everyone up.

2008 ZiPS Projection - Jason Bay
———————————————————————————————————-
Period       AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO SB   BA   OBP   SLG
———————————————————————————————————-
Year-to-Date 393 72 111 23 2 22 64 59 86   7 .282 .375 .519
Rest-of-Yr   183 33   51 12 1 10 32 27 45   3 .279 .374 .519
———————————————————————————————————-
Total       576 105 162 35 3 32 96 86 131 10 .281 .375 .519
———————————————————————————————————-
2009?      561 102 153 29 1 29 108 80 144   8 .273 .367 .483
———————————————————————————————————-
Top Comps:  Greg Vaughn, Ron Gant

 

2008 ZiPS Projection - Manny Ramirez
———————————————————————————————————-
Period       AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO SB   BA   OBP   SLG
———————————————————————————————————-
Year-to-Date 365 66 109 22 1 20 68 52 86   1 .299 .398 .529
Rest-of-Yr   154 27   43   8 0 10 33 25 38   0 .279 .390 .526
———————————————————————————————————-
Total       519 93 152 30 1 30 101 77 124   1 .293 .395 .528
———————————————————————————————————-
2009?      478 79 138 25 1 26 90 75 108   1 .289 .394 .508
———————————————————————————————————-
Top Comps:  Bob Johnson, Brian Downing

 

2008 ZiPS Projection - Andy LaRoche
———————————————————————————————————-
Period       AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO SB   BA   OBP   SLG
———————————————————————————————————-
Year-to-Date* 214 34   49   4 0   6 29 36 27   3 .229 .343 .332
Rest-of-Yr   125 16   31   6 0   4 16 16 18   1 .248 .338 .392
———————————————————————————————————-
* - Includes Minor League Translation  
———————————————————————————————————-
2009?      412 62 104 19 0 12 51 55 59   5 .252 .341 .386
———————————————————————————————————-
Top Comps:  Bob Aspromonte, Ken McMullen

 

2008 ZiPS Projection - Craig Hansen
————————————————————————————————
          W   L   G GS   IP   H   ER HR BB SO   ERA
————————————————————————————————
Year-to-Date*  2   3 43   0   44.2   41   23   2 29 36 4.63
Rest-of-Yr?  1   1 18   0   22.0   21   11   2 14 18 4.50
————————————————————————————————
* - Includes Minor League Translation
————————————————————————————————
2009?      3   4 56   1   71.0   70   34   4 40 56 4.31
————————————————————————————————
Top Comps:  Terry Adams, Duane Ward

 

2008 ZiPS Projection - Brandon Moss
———————————————————————————————————-
Period       AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO SB   BA   OBP   SLG
———————————————————————————————————-
Year-to-Date* 245 32   67 13 3   8 34 18 66   3 .273 .326 .449
Rest-of-Yr   152 17   39 11 1   4 21 14 40   1 .257 .323 .421
———————————————————————————————————-
* - Includes Minor League Translation  
———————————————————————————————————-
2009?      455 54 125 30 3 13 61 44 117   4 .275 .340 .440
———————————————————————————————————-
Top Comps:  Bruce “Not That One” Campbell, Ron Swoboda

 

Dan Szymborski Posted: July 31, 2008 at 09:25 PM | 84 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Related News:

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. 1k5v3L Posted: July 31, 2008 at 09:52 PM (#2885430)
I can only hope Joe Torre will settle on the proven veteran outfield setup with Manny in RF, Jones in CF and Pierre in LF.
This trade kind of sucks for the Dbacks right now.
   2. Dan Posted: July 31, 2008 at 09:57 PM (#2885432)
I think even Torre is smart enough to go Manny - Kemp - Ethier most of the time.
   3. Paul The Paranoid Android Posted: July 31, 2008 at 10:00 PM (#2885438)
I can only hope Joe Torre will settle on the proven veteran outfield setup with Manny in RF, Jones in CF and Pierre in LF.

You are an evil, evil man.
   4. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: July 31, 2008 at 10:04 PM (#2885443)
I've gotta imagine that Andruw Jones is going to spend the better part of August on the DL with some sort of knee problem and then come back only after rosters expand (and left off a postseason roster). He's completely useless right now, so much so that Juan Pierre is actually a better option (although I'd go Ramirez-Kemp-Ethier too).
   5. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: July 31, 2008 at 10:04 PM (#2885444)
I was going to post asking why Bay's numbers look the same in the AL as the NL, but I looked it up, and the park effects should even out the league change. So I buy it.
   6. TrueNorth Posted: July 31, 2008 at 10:05 PM (#2885445)
I betcha he goes Pierre in CF, Manny in LF & Kemp in RF most of the time.
   7. Dan Szymborski Posted: July 31, 2008 at 10:21 PM (#2885457)
The difference between Juan Pierre and Andre Ethier offensively is roughly the same as between Andre Ethier and Manny Ramirez offensively. So the Dodgers could make two Manny trades today, the second one for free, simply by relegating Pierre to Siberia or something.
   8. 1k5v3L Posted: July 31, 2008 at 10:26 PM (#2885464)
Kemp and Ethier still have options, right? Dodgers should send them down to AAA for more seasoning.
   9. Spahn Insane Posted: July 31, 2008 at 10:31 PM (#2885466)
The 5-year contract Colletti gave Pierre remains the most hilarious contract in major league history.
   10. Old Matt Posted: July 31, 2008 at 10:34 PM (#2885470)
The 5-year contract Colletti gave Pierre remains the most hilarious contract in major league history.

Nah, Mike Hampton and the Rockies.
   11. JMPH Posted: July 31, 2008 at 10:34 PM (#2885471)
The 5-year contract Colletti gave Pierre remains the most hilarious contract in major league history.

Nah, Mike Hampton and the Rockies.

Russ Ortiz.
   12. DCA Posted: July 31, 2008 at 10:40 PM (#2885477)
Dreifort. Only thing close is the deal Juan Gonzalez turned down.
   13. JMPH Posted: July 31, 2008 at 10:42 PM (#2885479)
Barry Zito's deal isn't looking good either.
   14. Walt Davis Posted: July 31, 2008 at 10:48 PM (#2885488)
That projection for LaRoche is pretty sad. Not wowed by this from the Pirates' perspective unless Morris is a big prospect. It's not bad and 4 for 1 should never be sneezed at. But I think an offseason trade of Bay for 1-2 better players was a real possibility.

Surely there's money going to the Dodgers. They supposedly needed money to take on Casey Blake.

I'm also surprised the Dodgers didn't toss something else in to get Wilson off the Pirates.

Looks like a fine trade for the Red Sox.

Now, where does Manny get to take his pee breaks without the Green Monster? Don't sit in the first couple of rows in LF.
   15. Walt Davis Posted: July 31, 2008 at 10:54 PM (#2885492)
Also, what happens to Jose Bautista now? Not that he is brilliant but his 97 OPS+ is average-ish for a 3B and that's roughly what he's done the last 3 years. Can he play 2B and supplant superstar Freddy Sanchez?

He's a real lesson in what a few truly craptastic PA can do for you. The last 3 years his OPS+s are 94, 96 and 97 in 1410 PA. But 127 truly crappy PA in his first two years (about a 27 OPS+) bring his career OPS+ all the way down to 90.

Anyway, it is nice to see the Pirates making some moves for their future. I'm just worried that they've added a lot of "organizational depth" without much quality.
   16. Walt Davis Posted: July 31, 2008 at 10:55 PM (#2885494)
OK, Robo reports Red Sox are picking up all of Manny's money.
   17. Mattbert Posted: July 31, 2008 at 10:57 PM (#2885497)
Zito's deal looks bad now, but I don't think even the most pessimistic Zito detractors would've guessed he'd be this poor. Juan Pierre, on the other hand, had well-established shortcomings before his deal was inked. He's been only very slightly worse than advertised. What distinguishes Pierre's deal from the other bad contracts mentioned is that all the other guys had a non-trivial chance of being pretty good players, with the possible exception of Russ Ortiz.
   18. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: July 31, 2008 at 10:58 PM (#2885498)
Surely there's money going to the Dodgers. They supposedly needed money to take on Casey Blake.


The Sox are paying for Manny the rest of the year.
   19. Hang down your head, Tom Foley Posted: July 31, 2008 at 11:02 PM (#2885500)
Now, where does Manny get to take his pee breaks without the Green Monster? Don't sit in the first couple of rows in LF.


The Dodger bullpen is out there.
   20. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: July 31, 2008 at 11:05 PM (#2885505)
"Also, what happens to Jose Bautista now? Not that he is brilliant but his 97 OPS+ is average-ish for a 3B and that's roughly what he's done the last 3 years. Can he play 2B and supplant superstar Freddy Sanchez?"

He goes to the bench, picking up spot starts. As he should, since he's a minus glove with an average bat.
   21. Walt Davis Posted: July 31, 2008 at 11:42 PM (#2885538)
[Bautista] goes to the bench, picking up spot starts. As he should, since he's a minus glove with an average bat.

Is LaRoche's glove superior? His ZiPS projection works out to a whopping 93 OPS+ making him a little worse a hitter than Bautista. This can't be anything more than a minor upgrade -- if that ZiPS projection for LaRoche is accurate.
   22. Darren Posted: July 31, 2008 at 11:48 PM (#2885541)
I like this deal for the Sox--I think Bay is a hair better than Manny and will cost Boston ~$16.5 mil (including the payoff to the Dodgers) over the next two years compared to $27 mil. if they kept Manny. Marginal guys like Hansen and Moss are worth throwing in for that savings and lack of headaches.

I also like this for the Pirates. They got 4 useful players, with LaRoche appearing to be the best. They might have done a bit better waiting and trying to get 1-2 great prospects, but what they got was decent.

I don't love this for the Dodgers. Manny is a little bit redundant and he is going to punish them in the vast OF in LA. It's not a terrible move, though.
   23. Swedish Chef Posted: July 31, 2008 at 11:54 PM (#2885547)
But the party that really wins most in this trade is Manny Ramirez.
   24. Darren Posted: July 31, 2008 at 11:56 PM (#2885550)
How so? He's going to a worse hitting environment which will expose his defensive shortcomings. His antics have also probably made some teams think twice about signing him next year.
   25. Swedish Chef Posted: August 01, 2008 at 12:13 AM (#2885578)
He got his free agency and probably his last big contract. And if Griffey can be recruited to play CF, Manny's shortcomings on D will not be an issue.
   26. Stately, Plump Buck Mulligan Posted: August 01, 2008 at 12:27 AM (#2885596)
So if I understand this from the Red Sox POV, they...

Give up .33 years of Manny, 1.33 years of Hansen, Moss, and about $14.5 million (6.7M for '08 Manny, 1.9M for '08 Bay, 7.5M for '09 Bay less, say, about 1.5M for Hansen and Moss in '08 and '09)

Receive 1.33 years of Jason Bay

Is that correct?
   27. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: August 01, 2008 at 12:30 AM (#2885600)
But the party that really wins most in this trade is Manny Ramirez.


I'd say it's Andy LaRoche, but of course he IS going to the Pirates, so...
   28. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: August 01, 2008 at 12:37 AM (#2885606)
Moss is the clear winner of the trade. He gets to play in the majors everyday (or at least platoon), which wasn't going to happen in Boston. He'll have a chance to put together some decent numbers hitting in the middle of the order, which probably means that when he's a FA at age 30 some team is going to vastly overpay him in a multiyear deal.

If he doesn't get out of Boston and just lingers around as a AAAA player, there's a good chance that he never makes any real money. Nothing is certain (he'll still have to perform, obviously), but his earnings expectation for the remainder of his pro career just went way up.
   29. ellsbury my heart at wounded knee Posted: August 01, 2008 at 12:50 AM (#2885615)
Does anyone believe that Manny actually has problems with his knees, or do we just assume that he was making that up? Because if it turns out that he does have some lingering knee pain, that could him even more of an adventure in the OF.
   30. Darren Posted: August 01, 2008 at 12:54 AM (#2885618)
Stately, I don't understand your math in 26. The Sox controlled Hansen/Moss for like 4 more years each. As I see it from the Red Sox perspective:

Trade .33 years of Manny, which would have cost them $7 mil. They get back Bay for 1.33 years at a cost of $16.5 mil (his salary plus Manny's). To keep Manny for those 1.33 years would have cost $27 mil. To get those savings (and a slight upgrade in talent) they traded Moss and Hansen.
   31. Darren Posted: August 01, 2008 at 12:56 AM (#2885621)
And I'm repeating myself in the same thread.
   32. Dan Posted: August 01, 2008 at 12:59 AM (#2885624)
And I'm repeating myself in the same thread.

The more things change...
   33. Russ Posted: August 01, 2008 at 01:14 AM (#2885640)
Is LaRoche's glove superior? His ZiPS projection works out to a whopping 93 OPS+ making him a little worse a hitter than Bautista. This can't be anything more than a minor upgrade -- if that ZiPS projection for LaRoche is accurate.


The biggest thing that bugs me about LaRoche is that he's going to turn 25 in September. If he doesn't start to outhit that projection in the header next year, he's likely never going to be more than an average 3rd baseman on the whole (maybe one or two close to All-Star years, but pretty much average the rest of the way). That has value certainly, but it's a risk.

On the other hand, the Dodgers have so completely screwed around with him, that he may be able to catch fire. I'm a big believer in the importance of regular MLB playing time for development purposes, so hopefully the last two months will be key for LaRoche. Having his brother around hopefully will help his confidence as well.
   34. Stately, Plump Buck Mulligan Posted: August 01, 2008 at 01:36 AM (#2885660)
Stately, I don't understand your math in 26. The Sox controlled Hansen/Moss for like 4 more years each. As I see it from the Red Sox perspective:

Trade .33 years of Manny, which would have cost them $7 mil. They get back Bay for 1.33 years at a cost of $16.5 mil (his salary plus Manny's). To keep Manny for those 1.33 years would have cost $27 mil. To get those savings (and a slight upgrade in talent) they traded Moss and Hansen.


Darren, I think we're comparing two different things. You're comparing the cost of acquiring and having Bay for the next 1.33 years to the cost of keeping Manny for the next 1.33 years (by exercising his '09 option). I'm only comparing what the Red Sox gave up to what they acquired in this particular deal.

I tried to exclude Moss from the equation, as he has almost no service time -- we have no idea what he'll do or be paid over the next six years. I frankly don't know about Hansen -- I misread his contract on Cot's, and it looks like he's signed only through '08. Is that right? It says he signed a 4-year deal in '05 and gets 700K this year, but only had 0.108 years of service time prior to '08. What happens after this year ends?
   35. akrasian Posted: August 01, 2008 at 01:48 AM (#2885673)
On the other hand, the Dodgers have so completely screwed around with him, that he may be able to catch fire. I'm a big believer in the importance of regular MLB playing time for development purposes, so hopefully the last two months will be key for LaRoche. Having his brother around hopefully will help his confidence as well.

I don't think the Dodgers really have screwed around with him. They wanted him to get the starting job out of spring training - it was his to lose - when he got injured and had surgery on his thumb. During his rehab stint he showed a fraction of the power he's shown in the past, and has continued to show a lack of power - my understanding is that it's not uncommon for players coming off of major hand injuries to take a while to recover their power, even when "healthy". Playing everyday this season might help him, but I suspect he won't really be back until next year.
   36. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: August 01, 2008 at 01:56 AM (#2885686)
I frankly don't know about Hansen -- I misread his contract on Cot's, and it looks like he's signed only through '08. Is that right? It says he signed a 4-year deal in '05 and gets 700K this year, but only had 0.108 years of service time prior to '08. What happens after this year ends?

If he's a Super 2, he'll be eligible for arbitration. If not, then the team can renew his contract for a salary similar to what he got in 2008. He'll be arbitration eligible until the first offseason when he has 6 or more years of service time.
   37. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: August 01, 2008 at 01:57 AM (#2885687)
If he doesn't start to outhit that projection in the header next year, he's likely never going to be more than an average 3rd baseman on the whole (maybe one or two close to All-Star years, but pretty much average the rest of the way)

Hmm... Scott Cooper was a two time All Star.
   38. Walt Davis Posted: August 01, 2008 at 02:00 AM (#2885695)
I tried to exclude Moss from the equation, as he has almost no service time -- we have no idea what he'll do or be paid over the next six years. I frankly don't know about Hansen -- I misread his contract on Cot's, and it looks like he's signed only through '08. Is that right? It says he signed a 4-year deal in '05 and gets 700K this year, but only had 0.108 years of service time prior to '08. What happens after this year ends?

He must have signed a ML-contract as a draft pick. All that did was keep him on the 40-man roster, it doesn't impact service time, arb-eligibility or FA-eligibility. So he's got a while to go to get to arb.

And for those that don't know, in Cots-speak, .108 is 108 days of service time.
   39. Enrico Pallazzo Posted: August 01, 2008 at 02:01 AM (#2885697)
If he doesn't start to outhit that projection in the header next year, he's likely never going to be more than an average 3rd baseman on the whole (maybe one or two close to All-Star years, but pretty much average the rest of the way).

He's going to be Joe Randa?
   40. Darren Posted: August 01, 2008 at 02:10 AM (#2885712)
Darren, I think we're comparing two different things. You're comparing the cost of acquiring and having Bay for the next 1.33 years to the cost of keeping Manny for the next 1.33 years (by exercising his '09 option). I'm only comparing what the Red Sox gave up to what they acquired in this particular deal.



I don't see the distinction. They gave up Manny and Moss and Hansen and the costs associated with them. They acquired Bay and the costs associated with him (which, for convenience, I added to Manny's remaining salary). These are the things they gave up and what they acquired.
   41. jamcadbury Posted: August 01, 2008 at 02:23 AM (#2885732)
Russ Ortiz.

Chan Ho Park?
   42. Perro(s) Posted: August 01, 2008 at 02:31 AM (#2885741)
That projection for LaRoche is pretty sad.

It's gotta be wrong. LaRoche has star written all over him, the Dodgers have just been screwing him around. </sarcasm>

Seriously, he might be an above-average major leaguer if he can keep from hurting himself. He's got a ways to go to even equal Adam.
   43. Gainsay Posted: August 01, 2008 at 02:47 AM (#2885751)
The Sox also get an inside track on resigning Bay, which is worth something. Unlike Texiera, he's never given any indication he's guaranteed to go to free agency. He can probably be signed to a contract similar to JD Drew's, which is a decent way for a big market club like the Sox to spend money.
   44. Stately, Plump Buck Mulligan Posted: August 01, 2008 at 03:14 AM (#2885785)
I don't see the distinction. They gave up Manny and Moss and Hansen and the costs associated with them. They acquired Bay and the costs associated with him (which, for convenience, I added to Manny's remaining salary). These are the things they gave up and what they acquired.


But in post #22 you ran the numbers including $20 million if they kept Manny -- that may be a cost, but it's an illusory one when you consider that the Red Sox could have kept Manny WITHOUT exercising the option. I don't think you can count that as a savings. The team's options were:

1. Trade Manny + for Bay in this deal
2. Keep Manny +, and exercise his option for '09
3. Keep Manny +, don't exercise his '09 option, and use the savings to get someone else (Teixeira or Dunn or Burrell?) -- at this point, and only at this point, can you do a comparison between Manny at $20 million, with all of his positives and negatives, and where you spent the $20 million instead

I'm NOT saying that the Red Sox got a bad deal, and I DO recognize that there are advantages to getting Bay at this point (as Gainsay said in post #43; plus, you aren't guaranteed that you'll get one of those guys mentioned above). But if you're going to run the numbers for this deal, then I think you can run the numbers only for this deal. In other words, option #1 only.
   45. Matt Garza smells it deep (Mr. Tapeworm) Posted: August 01, 2008 at 01:12 PM (#2886004)
Barry Zito's deal isn't looking good either.


Carl Pavano. $40 million, four years, 111 crappy IP.
   46. Jose Canusee Posted: August 01, 2008 at 06:29 PM (#2886437)
Started in an Ohio city starting with C, puts up some good numbers and goes to a WS but core of team is broken up...goes to AL East team starting with B and puts up more good numbers and gets a couple of rings and ...still dangerous at age 36, goes out to the Dodgers...
Mr. Ramirez, meet your fellow 500 HR predecessor. Deja vu? Don't think he will ever become a MLB mgr though.
   47. ian Posted: August 01, 2008 at 07:13 PM (#2886530)
The Red Sox get whiter and whiter as time passes.
   48. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: August 01, 2008 at 07:28 PM (#2886573)
"Is LaRoche's glove superior? His ZiPS projection works out to a whopping 93 OPS+ making him a little worse a hitter than Bautista. This can't be anything more than a minor upgrade -- if that ZiPS projection for LaRoche is accurate."

I don't think that it is. But even if it's accurate, Bautista has about as little value as it's possible for someone with his offensive numbers to have. He's streaky, he's fragile, he's probably around a -10 as a true-talent defender, and he even showed up on Dewan's list of the five worst baserunners (so far) this year. He's able to fake it at five different positions, but that's not really an attribute you use a lot as an everyday 3B...
   49. Darren Posted: August 01, 2008 at 10:57 PM (#2886862)
I see now. And in a way, mine was sort of a false choice, because they weren't likely to re-up with Manny. The proper comparison might be to include everything that I mention above except the part where Manny is re-upped. Then it's Bay for 1.33 at $16 mil vs. Manny for .33 at $7 mil. + Moss and Hansen + paying through the nose for one of the other options on the market this offseason.

Ian in #47, I've noticed that too. Every new acquisition seems to be a white guy replacing a Latino.
   50. Mattbert Posted: August 01, 2008 at 11:32 PM (#2886892)
They better try to slip Ortiz through waivers on a deal for Travis Hafner or somebody before anyone figures out Operation Whitewash.
   51. OCD SS Posted: August 01, 2008 at 11:33 PM (#2886895)
Theo's master plan is to fill the entire 25 man roster with clones of JD Drew.
   52. ellsbury my heart at wounded knee Posted: August 02, 2008 at 12:38 AM (#2886997)
I'm keeping my eyes peeled for a trade for a Bay/Buccholz for Braun trade, to get a few more Hebrews on the team. All these WASPy guys doesn't feel right.
   53. Enrico Pallazzo Posted: August 02, 2008 at 03:47 AM (#2887372)
Theo's master plan is to fill the entire 25 man roster with clones of JD Drew Scott Hatteberg.

Best. Offense. Ever.
   54. Der Komminsk-sar Posted: August 02, 2008 at 03:54 AM (#2887375)
LaRoche's rep is that he's an average-to-plus defender (at one point, he was called a future GGer, but I don't hear that anymore) but I'm less optimistic - as I'm not big on his range.
Conversely (like many), I think he's a better hitter than he's shown...
   55. Der Komminsk-sar Posted: August 02, 2008 at 03:56 AM (#2887376)
"The Dodgers give up LaRoche and Morris for Manny Ramirez. They should've taken Bay..."

I don't think that was an option. 1 - They would have needed to come up with more prospects. 2 - They would have needed to find the cash to pay him.
   56. calhounite Posted: August 03, 2008 at 03:23 PM (#2888326)
Washington just cut Lopez. and injury boy should be going any day now

That brings the Krivsky brainstorm down from

the worst ever possibly conceivable past, now, future in any possible conceivable universe

to...

the worst ever possibly conceivable past, now, future in any possible conceivable universe


and that's weighed 99.999999% actual results and .0000001% reasonable expectations going forward


dang those reasonable expectations
   57. Dan Szymborski Posted: August 03, 2008 at 03:44 PM (#2888335)
I don't think that was an option. 1 - They would have needed to come up with more prospects. 2 - They would have needed to find the cash to pay him.

The Pirates reportedly settled for Brignac and Niemann - I suspect that the reason that didn't go through was because this fell into their lap. Bay makes $1.8 million for the rest of the year and $7.5 million next year and I'm sure the Dodgers aren't that cash-strapped.
   58. Keith Law Posted: August 03, 2008 at 04:03 PM (#2888339)
The Pirates reportedly settled for Brignac and Niemann


Dan, I heard from both sides on Thursday that this offer was never made by either side.
   59. Artie Ziff Posted: August 05, 2008 at 03:57 PM (#2890796)
While Ramirez will go down as the biggest baby in Boston baseball history, a good portion, possibly a majority, of the fans are going to miss his contributions eventually. It really is too bad his actions finally turned into hatred in Beantown.
   60. Famous Original Joe C Posted: August 05, 2008 at 04:11 PM (#2890813)
It really is too bad his actions finally turned into hatred in Beantown.

Hatred? Who could hate Manny? That's hardly the emotion that's being tossed around, at least that I can tell or have heard.
   61. Toby Posted: August 05, 2008 at 06:28 PM (#2891047)
#47 and 49,

rather than vague allusions to racism, how about some actual data crunching on this "whiter and whiter" theory of yours?

By my back-of-the-envelope count, the "whiteness" of the team has been pretty stable each year since 2003. Arguably, this year's team as it came out of spring training was the least "white" of any Sox team since Henry bought the team. Now that Manny's gone and Lugo's out it is a bit whiter than when it started the year, but soon Lugo will be back and Colon will be in the rotation.

In the Henry era we've almost always had whites at C (Tek), 1B (Millar, Youks), 2B (Bellhorn through Pedroia), and RF (Trot, Drew). We've almost always had nonwhites at DH (Papi), SS (Nomar through Lugo), LF (Manny), and CF (Damon through Ellsbury). We've gone from a white 3B (Mueller) to a nonwhite (Lowell). The proverbial "10th man" used to be white (Hillenbrand), now he's nonwhite (Crisp).

The rotation has generally had either one nonwhite (Pedro, Dice-K) or none. The top three or four roles in the bullpen have almost always been majority white, but this year three of the top four roles are nonwhite (Oki, Delcarmen, Lopez).

I don't know how you can say the team is getting whiter and whiter, unless you think of Lowell and Ellsbury as white guys and you forget about Lugo and Colon. The 2004 through 2006 teams were appreciably whiter than the 2008 team, especially in the pitching staffs, but also at 3b.
   62. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: August 05, 2008 at 06:39 PM (#2891072)
"Dan, I heard from both sides on Thursday that this offer was never made by either side."

I've seen it reported both ways. I don't know that we'll ever know the truth for sure.
   63. Harmon "Thread Killer" Microbrew Posted: August 05, 2008 at 07:12 PM (#2891157)
In the Henry era we've almost always had whites at C (Tek), 1B (Millar, Youks), 2B (Bellhorn through Pedroia), and RF (Trot, Drew). We've almost always had nonwhites at DH (Papi), SS (Nomar through Lugo), LF (Manny), and CF (Damon through Ellsbury). We've gone from a white 3B (Mueller) to a nonwhite (Lowell). The proverbial "10th man" used to be white (Hillenbrand), now he's nonwhite (Crisp).

No real comment on Toby's point, but wow, I'm out of touch with a number of player ethnicities. If you had asked me, I would have identified Damon, Lowell and Ellsbury as "white". Of course, no one asked me... :P
   64. Toby Posted: August 05, 2008 at 07:26 PM (#2891199)
Just to clarify, I write only to analyze the idea that there's a trend of getting whiter and whiter. I take no position, not here at least, on what ratio of whiteness to nonwhiteness is desirable or appropriate and where the Sox stand in relation to that.
   65. Toby Posted: August 05, 2008 at 07:34 PM (#2891221)
Harmon--

Lowell is Cuban (his father is of Irish and German descent), Ellsbury is Navajo, Damon's mother is Thai. Of course, ethnicity is a slippery concept. Most people don't realize Ted Williams was Latino; his mother was Mexican. Conversely, most people don't realize Keith Hernandez is *not* Latino; his parents came here from Spain.
   66. ian Posted: August 05, 2008 at 10:31 PM (#2891701)
Lowell is white. Ellsbury has a white father and a Navajo mother who grew up in a Mormon boarding school.

Regardless, the point is the aesthetic. The team has replaced dark-skinned players with light-skinned players. Fact.
   67. Toby Posted: August 06, 2008 at 12:11 PM (#2892451)
Thanks for the empirical analysis. Very persuasive.
   68. tjm1 Posted: August 06, 2008 at 01:45 PM (#2892499)
This discussion is reminding me of the infamous "White Jays" article in one of the Toronto papers a few years back. Carlos Delgado referred to it as one of the stupidest things he had ever read.
   69. ian Posted: August 07, 2008 at 02:13 PM (#2893909)
67, not my problem if you're too PC to note the obvious trend in skin pigmentation. No one mentioned it as being racist of the Sox except for you.
   70. Dizzypaco Posted: August 07, 2008 at 02:21 PM (#2893925)
No one mentioned it as being racist of the Sox except for you.

If you aren't implying racism, why even bring it up? Yes, the team has less players of a dark skin pigmentation than a few years ago, but what's the point?
   71. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: August 07, 2008 at 02:33 PM (#2893941)
"If you aren't implying racism, why even bring it up?"

I guess he just thought it was odd.
   72. OCD SS Posted: August 07, 2008 at 02:47 PM (#2893961)
You can also look at the people coming up through the system. Unscientifically, of the Sox top 20 prospects (using soxprospects.com) only 2 of the top 10 are non-white (Almanzar and Lin). Through the next 10, only 3 are non-white (Navarro, Tejeda, and Exposito; although this will change when Lowrie loses his prospect status and Diaz becomes # 20).

I have no doubt that this is not some master plan of the FO, but is just a fluke of talent acquisition that is a bit more noticeable given Boston's history.
   73. villageidiom Posted: August 07, 2008 at 03:19 PM (#2894000)
The team has replaced dark-skinned players with light-skinned players. Fact.
That fact is also true of EVERY MLB TEAM. Every team has, at some point, replaced dark-skinned players with light-skinned players. It's also fact that they (and other teams) have replaced light-skinned players with dark-skinned players.

No one mentioned it as being racist of the Sox except for you.
He didn't mention the Sox were being racist. He suggested that you were making vague allusions to the Sox being racist. The only thing you've cleared up since then is that you count ethnicities differently from Toby (and Mike Lowell, and Jacoby Ellsbury). That one has to quibble over whether Mike Lowell has lighter, similar, or darker pigmentation than Bill Mueller, or the same for Ellsbury vs. Crisp vs. Damon, or the same for Lugo vs. Renteria vs. Cabrera vs. Nomar, in order to indicate any kind of trend is a pretty good indication that there's no clear trend. Fact.
   74. ian Posted: August 07, 2008 at 04:30 PM (#2894086)
That fact is also true of EVERY MLB TEAM. Every team has, at some point, replaced dark-skinned players with light-skinned players. It's also fact that they (and other teams) have replaced light-skinned players with dark-skinned players.

It's a fact in terms of a trend is what I was asserting. You used to have an OF 2/3 African-American with a middle infield that was Hispanic. Now it's Bay & Ellsbury, Lowrie & Pedroia. That's 4 guys of "color" replaced with 4 guys free of "color". Just interesting to see the turnover coincidentally happen that way.

Where is this vague assertion that the Sox are racist?
   75. Toby Posted: August 08, 2008 at 02:46 PM (#2895023)
Look, this is not rocket science, nor is it PC. The Red Sox traded a star Latino player and two white guys and got back a white guy. You (ian, #47) took this as an opportunity to claim that the Red Sox are getting "whiter and whiter". Darren (#49) added that every new acquisition was a white guy replacing a Latino. These are vague allusions to racism. You are asserting that there is a correlation between the skin color (ian, #47) or the ethnicity (Darren, #49) of the guys leaving and the guys arriving. Since you went out of your way to assert the correlation, people can reasonably infer that you are speculating there is causation as well.

In this case, it's pretty easy to draw the inference because the correlation you assert isn't even true -- the Sox are not, as a clear trend, getting whiter and whiter under any empirical analysis. At least not one that I can see, and certainly not one that you have demonstrated. If you yearn for the days when Troy O'Leary and Carl Everett were 2/3 of the outfield and Jose Offerman and Nomar Garciaparra formed the middle infield, I think that makes you the one who's being PC.
   76. ellsbury my heart at wounded knee Posted: August 08, 2008 at 03:05 PM (#2895040)
I think the "whiteing" of the Red Sox also points to what a crappy job they've done in international scouting the last 10-15 years or so. I'm struggling to think of foreign-born player they've brought up. There was Hanley Ramirez, but was traded for some whiteish guys.

I'm not sure anyone thinks the Red Sox use race in any way to make personnel decisions - it's just weird that the team seems to be changing in that way. Nothing wrong with pointing out the obvious. I'd like to see the Red Sox be more diverse (a bunch of white/whiteish dudes just seems boring), but not at the expense of quality of play.
   77. villageidiom Posted: August 08, 2008 at 03:32 PM (#2895077)
You used to have an OF 2/3 African-American with a middle infield that was Hispanic. Now it's Bay & Ellsbury, Lowrie & Pedroia.
How convenient that you ignore the African-American player who has started the most games in CF, and the Hispanic player who will likely return to SS once he comes back from the DL. And, of course, that Mike Lowell's skin is darker than Bill Mueller's - sticking with the "pigmentation, not ethnicity" thing.

So, yeah, if you ignore three fielding positions - and the four (C, 1B, 2B, RF) that've been white for a while, and DH - there's a trend toward lighter-skinned players. There's also trends toward Canadians, Asians, laptop-swindlers, cancer survivors, and players whose last name starts with "B". Some of these are more worthwhile topics.
   78. karlmagnus Posted: August 08, 2008 at 03:43 PM (#2895093)
I think the true tendency is towards white bread, vanilla personalities. Obviously the "cowboy up" Red Sox and the Idiots were deeply disturbing to the FO, so they've now gone out and recruited Canadians to replace the troublemakers. Their own cultural sensitivity was not sufficient to deal with diverse cultural backgrounds and avoid e.g. "dissing" Manny repeatedly over a number of years.

Wouldn't mind betting the Dice-K contract ends badly, though he's certainly no troublemaker.
   79. tjm1 Posted: August 08, 2008 at 03:59 PM (#2895110)
I think the true tendency is towards white bread, vanilla personalities. Obviously the "cowboy up" Red Sox and the Idiots were deeply disturbing to the FO, so they've now gone out and recruited Canadians to replace the troublemakers.


That's certainly true. Of course, the Celtics have brought in guys with similar personalities, who happen to be black.

If you look point by point at the guys they got rid of from the "idiots" squad, they were predominantly good baseball decisions. Which of those guys should they have kept? Derek Lowe, in hindsight, I suppose, and maybe Cabrera, but those were all defensible decisions at the time they were made. The team has kept winning. So, if you agree that Damon and Pedro, for example, were done, whom would you have brought in who was a good ballplayer and more less "white-bread?" I don't think they're ignoring talent. For what it's worth, the 2006 Red Sox did, I believe, set a record for the most Jewish players used during a season (Youkilis, Kapler, Stern and Breslow).
   80. villageidiom Posted: August 08, 2008 at 04:07 PM (#2895115)
For what it's worth, the 2006 Red Sox did, I believe, set a record for the most Jewish players used during a season (Youkilis, Kapler, Stern and Breslow).
If I ignore Stern, the trend toward Canadians is even more clear.
   81. Toby Posted: August 08, 2008 at 04:22 PM (#2895134)
I think it's a bit warped to focus on Pedro and Manny and Hanley and not also consider this is a team whose biggest star is Big Papi, that gave big bucks to Renteria and Lugo and Matsuzaka, that traded a good cheap young pitcher for Wily Mo Pena, that replaced Damon with Crisp, that brought in Colon, that has given more and more responsibility to Delcarmen and Lopez.

Except for the latter two guys, and for Papi of course, I think it's pretty fair to say that every one of these nonwhite acquisitions were expected to make significantly bigger contributions than they have. They've all been significantly disappointing. And I think that's what's at work here. Darren and I discussed this on a thread a year or two ago. The personnel is not getting whiter and whiter, but you can make a case that the star power is. Renteria and Lugo and Matsuzaka and Pena and Crisp and Colon were expected to have a big impact, and they haven't. Most of these guys are still here, but they are less important and lower profile than expected. (I still have hopes for Colon.)
   82. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: August 08, 2008 at 04:45 PM (#2895161)
Started in an Ohio city starting with C, puts up some good numbers and goes to a WS but core of team is broken up...goes to AL East team starting with B and puts up more good numbers and gets a couple of rings and ...still dangerous at age 36, goes out to the Dodgers...


Albert Belle tried to go this route but it didn't quite work out the same way.
   83. villageidiom Posted: August 08, 2008 at 07:04 PM (#2895396)
Albert Belle tried to go this route but it didn't quite work out the same way.

Somehow I wouldn't be surprised if next week we hear that the Dodgers were going to sign Albert Belle.
   84. Darren Posted: August 10, 2008 at 11:37 PM (#2897704)
I don't see how my post implies that the Red Sox are doing this intentionally. But I stand behind my belief that the 'face' of the Red Sox has gotten quite a bit whiter. The stars of the Red Sox in 03 were Manny/Nomar/Pedro/Ortiz/Damon/(Trot? Tek?). Who are they now? Ortiz/Beckett/Papelbon/Dice/Drew/Bay/(Youkilis? Pedroia? Tek?)

It's a subjective thing, of course, but I haven't seen anything that's convinced me that the Sox haven't gotten whiter in recent years.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
tshipman
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats

 

 

 

 

Page rendered in 0.4976 seconds
66 querie(s) executed